amendments. (See Complaint ¶ 39 (“In other instances, Defendants’ website incorporates some but not all amendments made by the jurisdiction.”)). The claim that UpCodes offers integrated amendments is not rendered false by the fact that “some but not all” amendments are posted, or that in some instances, the amendments contain errors. The alleged errors instead undermine UpCodes’s representations of accuracy and completeness, as further discussed below. To the extent the false advertising claims arise from UpCodes’s representations regarding amendment integration, they are therefore dismissed.
- 2. Representations of Accuracy and Completeness
Defendants argue that the statements of accuracy and completeness are nonactionable puffery because they are hyperbolic, “clearly exaggerated,” and not the measurable assertions that would create liability. (Premotion Letter at 2.) Defendants further contend that the claims fail because the alleged misstatements are not “material,” and ICC cannot plausibly allege injury because ICC’s website contains more errors than UpCodes’s website.
In response, Plaintiff argues that the alleged misstatements are not puffery because they are not vague but provable. Plaintiff further contends that the claims are not puffery because the instantaneous updating they assert is
16
